SECOND PART

The first man, who, after enclosing a piece of ground, took it into

his head to say, "This is mine," and found people simple enough to

believe him, was the true founder of civil society. How many crimes,

how many wars, how many murders, how many misfortunes and horrors,

would that man have saved the human species, who pulling up the stakes

or filling up the ditches should have cried to his fellows: Be sure

not to listen to this imposter; you are lost, if you forget that the

fruits of the earth belong equally to us all, and the earth itself to

nobody! But it is highly probable that things were now come to such a

pass, that they could not continue much longer in the same way; for as

this idea of property depends on several prior ideas which could only

spring up gradually one after another, it was not formed all at once

in the human mind: men must have made great progress; they must have

acquired a great stock of industry and knowledge, and transmitted and

increased it from age to age before they could arrive at this last

term of the state of nature. Let us therefore take up things a little

higher, and collect into one point of view, and in their most natural

order, this slow succession of events and mental improvements.

The first sentiment of man was that of his existence, his first care

that of preserving it. The productions of the earth yielded him all

the assistance he required; instinct prompted him to make use of them.

Among the various appetites, which made him at different times

experience different modes of existence, there was one that excited

him to perpetuate his species; and this blind propensity, quite void

of anything like pure love or affection, produced nothing but an act

that was merely animal. The present heat once allayed, the sexes took

no further notice of each other, and even the child ceased to have any

tie in his mother, the moment he ceased to want her assistance.

Such was the condition of infant man; such was the life of an animal

confined at first to pure sensations, and so far from harbouring any

thought of forcing her gifts from nature, that he scarcely availed

himself of those which she offered to him of her own accord. But

difficulties soon arose, and there was a necessity for learning how to

surmount them: the height of some trees, which prevented his reaching

their fruits; the competition of other animals equally fond of the

same fruits; the fierceness of many that even aimed at his life; these

were so many circumstances, which obliged him to apply to bodily

exercise. There was a necessity for becoming active, swift-footed, and

sturdy in battle. The natural arms, which are stones and the branches

of trees, soon offered themselves to his assistance. He learned to

surmount the obstacles of nature, to contend in case of necessity with

other animals, to dispute his subsistence even with other men, or

indemnify himself for the loss of whatever he found himself obliged to

part with to the strongest.

In proportion as the human species grew more numerous, and extended

itself, its pains likewise multiplied and increased. The difference

of soils, climates and seasons, might have forced men to observe some

difference in their way of living. Bad harvests, long and severe

winters, and scorching summers which parched up all the fruits of the

earth, required extraordinary exertions of industry. On the sea shore,

and the banks of rivers, they invented the line and the hook, and

became fishermen and ichthyophagous. In the forests they made

themselves bows and arrows, and became huntsmen and warriors. In the

cold countries they covered themselves with the skins of the beasts

they had killed; thunder, a volcano, or some happy accident made them

acquainted with fire, a new resource against the rigours of winter:

they discovered the method of preserving this element, then that of

reproducing it, and lastly the way of preparing with it the flesh of

animals, which heretofore they devoured raw from the carcass.

This reiterated application of various beings to himself, and to one

another, must have naturally engendered in the mind of man the idea of

certain relations. These relations, which we express by the words,

great, little, strong, weak, swift, slow, fearful, bold, and the like,

compared occasionally, and almost without thinking of it, produced in

him some kind of reflection, or rather a mechanical prudence, which

pointed out to him the precautions most essential to his preservation

and safety.

The new lights resulting from this development increased his

superiority over other animals, by making him sensible of it. He laid

himself out to ensnare them; he played them a thousand tricks; and

though several surpassed him in strength or in swiftness, he in time

became the master of those that could be of any service to him, and a

sore enemy to those that could do him any mischief. 'Tis thus, that

the first look he gave into himself produced the first emotion of

pride in him; 'tis thus that, at a time he scarce knew how to

distinguish between the different ranks of existence, by attributing

to his species the first rank among animals in general, he prepared

himself at a distance to pretend to it as an individual among those of

his own species in particular.

Though other men were not to him what they are to us, and he had

scarce more intercourse with them than with other animals, they were

not overlooked in his observations. The conformities, which in time

he might discover between them, and between himself and his female,

made him judge of those he did not perceive; and seeing that they all

behaved as himself would have done in similar circumstances, he

concluded that their manner of thinking and willing was quite

conformable to his own; and this important truth, when once engraved

deeply on his mind, made him follow, by a presentiment as sure as any

logic, and withal much quicker, the best rules of conduct, which for

the sake of his own safety and advantage it was proper he should

observe towards them.

Instructed by experience that the love of happiness is the sole

principle of all human actions, he found himself in a condition to

distinguish the few cases, in which common interest might authorize

him to build upon the assistance of his fellows, and those still

fewer, in which a competition of interests might justly render it

suspected. In the first case he united with them in the same flock, or

at most by some kind of free association which obliged none of its

members, and lasted no longer than the transitory necessity that had

given birth to it. In the second case every one aimed at his own

private advantage, either by open force if he found himself strong

enough, or by cunning and address if he thought himself too weak to

use violence.

Such was the manner in which men might have insensibly acquired some

gross idea of their mutual engagements and the advantage of fulfilling

them, but this only as far as their present and sensible interest

required; for as to foresight they were utter strangers to it, and far

from troubling their heads about a distant futurity, they scarce

thought of the day following. Was a deer to be taken? Every one saw

that to succeed he must faithfully stand to his post; but suppose a

hare to have slipped by within reach of any one of them, it is not to

be doubted but he pursued it without scruple, and when he had seized

his prey never reproached himself with having made his companions miss

theirs.

We may easily conceive that such an intercourse scarce required a more

refined language than that of crows and monkeys, which flock together

almost in the same manner. Inarticulate exclamations, a great many

gestures, and some imitative sounds, must have been for a long time

the universal language of mankind, and by joining to these in every

country some articulate and conventional sounds, of which, as I have

already hinted, it is not very easy to explain the institution, there

arose particular languages, but rude, imperfect, and such nearly as

are to be found at this day among several savage nations. My pen

straightened by the rapidity of time, the abundance of things I have

to say, and the almost insensible progress of the first improvements,

flies like an arrow over numberless ages, for the slower the

succession of events, the quicker I may allow myself to be in relating

them.

At length, these first improvements enabled man to improve at a

greater rate. Industry grew perfect in proportion as the mind became

more enlightened. Men soon ceasing to fall asleep under the first

tree, or take shelter in the first cavern, lit upon some hard and

sharp kinds of stone resembling spades or hatchets, and employed them

to dig the ground, cut down trees, and with the branches build huts,

which they afterwards bethought themselves of plastering over with

clay or dirt. This was the epoch of a first revolution, which produced

the establishment and distinction of families, and which introduced a

species of property, and along with it perhaps a thousand quarrels and

battles. As the strongest however were probably the first to make

themselves cabins, which they knew they were able to defend, we may

conclude that the weak found it much shorter and safer to imitate than

to attempt to dislodge them: and as to those, who were already

provided with cabins, no one could have any great temptation to seize

upon that of his neighbour, not so much because it did not belong to

him, as because it could be of no service to him; and as besides to

make himself master of it, he must expose himself to a very sharp

conflict with the present occupiers.

The first developments of the heart were the effects of a new

situation, which united husbands and wives, parents and children,

under one roof; the habit of living together gave birth to the

sweetest sentiments the human species is acquainted with, conjugal and

paternal love. Every family became a little society, so much the more

firmly united, as a mutual attachment and liberty were the only bonds

of it; and it was now that the sexes, whose way of life had been

hitherto the same, began to adopt different manners and customs. The

women became more sedentary, and accustomed themselves to stay at home

and look after the children, while the men rambled abroad in quest of

subsistence for the whole family. The two sexes likewise by living a

little more at their ease began to lose somewhat of their usual

ferocity and sturdiness; but if on the one hand individuals became

less able to engage separately with wild beasts, they on the other

were more easily got together to make a common resistance against

them.

In this new state of things, the simplicity and solitariness of man's

life, the limitedness of his wants, and the instruments which he had

invented to satisfy them, leaving him a great deal of leisure, he

employed it to supply himself with several conveniences unknown to his

ancestors; and this was the first yoke he inadvertently imposed upon

himself, and the first source of mischief which he prepared for his

children; for besides continuing in this manner to soften both body

and mind, these conveniences having through use lost almost all their

aptness to please, and even degenerated into real wants, the privation

of them became far more intolerable than the possession of them had

been agreeable; to lose them was a misfortune, to possess them no

happiness.

Here we may a little better discover how the use of speech insensibly

commences or improves in the bosom of every family, and may likewise

from conjectures concerning the manner in which divers particular

causes might have propagated language, and accelerated its progress by

rendering it every day more and more necessary. Great inundations or

earthquakes surrounded inhabited districts with water or precipices,

portions of the continent were by revolutions of the globe torn off

and split into islands. It is obvious that among men thus collected,

and forced to live together, a common idiom must have started up much

sooner, than among those who freely wandered through the forests of

the main land. Thus it is very possible that the inhabitants of the

islands formed in this manner, after their first essays in navigation,

brought among us the use of speech; and it is very probable at least

that society and languages commenced in islands and even acquired

perfection there, before the inhabitants of the continent knew

anything of either.

Everything now begins to wear a new aspect. Those who heretofore

wandered through the woods, by taking to a more settled way of life,

gradually flock together, coalesce into several separate bodies, and

at length form in every country distinct nations, united in character

and manners, not by any laws or regulations, but by an uniform manner

of life, a sameness of provisions, and the common influence of the

climate. A permanent neighborhood must at last infallibly create some

connection between different families. The transitory commerce

required by nature soon produced, among the youth of both sexes living

in contiguous cabins, another kind of commerce, which besides being

equally agreeable is rendered more durable by mutual intercourse. Men

begin to consider different objects, and to make comparisons; they

insensibly acquire ideas of merit and beauty, and these soon produce

sentiments of preference. By seeing each other often they contract a

habit, which makes it painful not to see each other always. Tender and

agreeable sentiments steal into the soul, and are by the smallest

opposition wound up into the most impetuous fury: Jealousy kindles

with love; discord triumphs; and the gentlest of passions requires

sacrifices of human blood to appease it.

In proportion as ideas and sentiments succeed each other, and the head

and the heart exercise themselves, men continue to shake off their

original wildness, and their connections become more intimate and

extensive. They now begin to assemble round a great tree: singing and

dancing, the genuine offspring of love and leisure, become the

amusement or rather the occupation of the men and women, free from

care, thus gathered together. Every one begins to survey the rest, and

wishes to be surveyed himself; and public esteem acquires a value. He

who sings or dances best; the handsomest, the strongest, the most

dexterous, the most eloquent, comes to be the most respected: this was

the first step towards inequality, and at the same time towards vice.

From these first preferences there proceeded on one side vanity and

contempt, on the other envy and shame; and the fermentation raised by

these new leavens at length produced combinations fatal to happiness

and innocence.

Men no sooner began to set a value upon each other, and know what

esteem was, than each laid claim to it, and it was no longer safe for

any man to refuse it to another. Hence the first duties of civility

and politeness, even among savages; and hence every voluntary injury

became an affront, as besides the mischief, which resulted from it as

an injury, the party offended was sure to find in it a contempt for

his person more intolerable than the mischief itself. It was thus that

every man, punishing the contempt expressed for him by others in

proportion to the value he set upon himself, the effects of revenge

became terrible, and men learned to be sanguinary and cruel. Such

precisely was the degree attained by most of the savage nations with

whom we are acquainted. And it is for want of sufficiently

distinguishing ideas, and observing at how great a distance these

people were from the first state of nature, that so many authors have

hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires a regular

system of police to be reclaimed; whereas nothing can be more gentle

than he in his primitive state, when placed by nature at an equal

distance from the stupidity of brutes, and the pernicious good sense

of civilized man; and equally confined by instinct and reason to the

care of providing against the mischief which threatens him, he is

withheld by natural compassion from doing any injury to others, so far

from being ever so little prone even to return that which he has

received. For according to the axiom of the wise Locke, Where there is

no property, there can be no injury.

But we must take notice, that the society now formed and the relations

now established among men required in them qualities different from

those, which they derived from their primitive constitution; that as a

sense of morality began to insinuate itself into human actions, and

every man, before the enacting of laws, was the only judge and avenger

of the injuries he had received, that goodness of heart suitable to

the pure state of nature by no means suited infant society; that it

was necessary punishments should become severer in the same proportion

that the opportunities of offending became more frequent, and the

dread of vengeance add strength to the too weak curb of the law. Thus,

though men were become less patient, and natural compassion had

already suffered some alteration, this period of the development of

the human faculties, holding a just mean between the indolence of the

primitive state, and the petulant activity of self-love, must have

been the happiest and most durable epoch. The more we reflect on this

state, the more convinced we shall be, that it was the least subject

of any to revolutions, the best for man, and that nothing could have

drawn him out of it but some fatal accident, which, for the public

good, should never have happened. The example of the savages, most of

whom have been found in this condition, seems to confirm that mankind

was formed ever to remain in it, that this condition is the real youth

of the world, and that all ulterior improvements have been so many

steps, in appearance towards the perfection of individuals, but in

fact towards the decrepitness of the species.

As long as men remained satisfied with their rustic cabins; as long as

they confined themselves to the use of clothes made of the skins of

other animals, and the use of thorns and fish-bones, in putting these

skins together; as long as they continued to consider feathers and

shells as sufficient ornaments, and to paint their bodies of different

colours, to improve or ornament their bows and arrows, to form and

scoop out with sharp-edged stones some little fishing boats, or clumsy

instruments of music; in a word, as long as they undertook such works

only as a single person could finish, and stuck to such arts as did

not require the joint endeavours of several hands, they lived free,

healthy, honest and happy, as much as their nature would admit, and

continued to enjoy with each other all the pleasures of an independent

intercourse; but from the moment one man began to stand in need of

another's assistance; from the moment it appeared an advantage for one

man to possess the quantity of provisions requisite for two, all

equality vanished; property started up; labour became necessary; and

boundless forests became smiling fields, which it was found necessary

to water with human sweat, and in which slavery and misery were soon

seen to sprout out and grow with the fruits of the earth.

Metallurgy and agriculture were the two arts whose invention produced

this great revolution. With the poet, it is gold and silver, but with

the philosopher it is iron and corn, which have civilized men, and

ruined mankind. Accordingly both one and the other were unknown to the

savages of America, who for that very reason have always continued

savages; nay other nations seem to have continued in a state of

barbarism, as long as they continued to exercise one only of these

arts without the other; and perhaps one of the best reasons that can

be assigned, why Europe has been, if not earlier, at least more

constantly and better civilized than the other quarters of the world,

is that she both abounds most in iron and is best qualified to

produce corn.

It is a very difficult matter to tell how men came to know anything of

iron, and the art of employing it: for we are not to suppose that they

should of themselves think of digging it out of the mines, and

preparing it for fusion, before they knew what could be the result of

such a process. On the other hand, there is the less reason to

attribute this discovery to any accidental fire, as mines are formed

nowhere but in dry and barren places, and such as are bare of trees

and plants, so that it looks as if nature had taken pains to keep from

us so mischievous a secret. Nothing therefore remains but the

extraordinary circumstance of some volcano, which, belching forth

metallic substances ready fused, might have given the spectators a

notion of imitating that operation of nature; and after all we must

suppose them endued with an extraordinary stock of courage and

foresight to undertake so painful a work, and have, at so great a

distance, an eye to the advantages they might derive from it;

qualities scarcely suitable but to heads more exercised, than those of

such discoverers can be supposed to have been.

As to agriculture, the principles of it were known a long time before

the practice of it took place, and it is hardly possible that men,

constantly employed in drawing their subsistence from trees and

plants, should not have early hit on the means employed by nature for

the generation of vegetables; but in all probability it was very late

before their industry took a turn that way, either because trees,

which with their land and water game supplied them with sufficient

food, did not require their attention; or because they did not know

the use of corn; or because they had no instruments to cultivate it;

or because they were destitute of foresight in regard to future

necessities; or in fine, because they wanted means to hinder others

from running away with the fruit of their labours. We may believe that

on their becoming more industrious they began their agriculture by

cultivating with sharp stones and pointed sticks a few pulse or roots

about their cabins; and that it was a long time before they knew the

method of preparing corn, and were provided with instruments necessary

to raise it in large quantities; not to mention the necessity there

is, in order to follow this occupation and sow lands, to consent to

lose something at present to gain a great deal hereafter; a precaution

very foreign to the turn of man's mind in a savage state, in which, as

I have already taken notice, he can hardly foresee his wants from

morning to night.

For this reason the invention of other arts must have been necessary

to oblige mankind to apply to that of agriculture. As soon as men

were wanted to fuse and forge iron, others were wanted to maintain

them. The more hands were employed in manufactures, the fewer hands

were left to provide subsistence for all, though the number of mouths

to be supplied with food continued the same; and as some required

commodities in exchange for their iron, the rest at last found out the

method of making iron subservient to the multiplication of

commodities. Hence on the one hand husbandry and agriculture, and on

the other the art of working metals and of multiplying the uses of

them.

To the tilling of the earth the distribution of it necessarily

succeeded, and to property once acknowledged, the first rules of

justice: for to secure every man his own, every man must have

something. Moreover, as men began to extend their views to futurity,

and all found themselves in possession of more or less goods capable

of being lost, every one in particular had reason to fear, lest

reprisals should be made on him for any injury he might do to others.

This origin is so much the more natural, as it is impossible to

conceive how property can flow from any other source but industry; for

what can a man add but his labour to things which he has not made, in

order to acquire a property in them? 'Tis the labour of the hands

alone, which giving the husbandman a title to the produce of the land

he has tilled gives him a title to the land itself, at least till he

has gathered in the fruits of it, and so on from year to year; and

this enjoyment forming a continued possession is easily transformed

into a property. The ancients, says Grotius, by giving to Ceres the

epithet of Legislatrix, and to a festival celebrated in her honour the

name of Thesmorphoria, insinuated that the distribution of lands

produced a new kind of right; that is, the right of property different

from that which results from the law of nature.

Things thus circumstanced might have remained equal, if men's talents

had been equal, and if, for instance, the use of iron, and the

consumption of commodities had always held an exact proportion to each

other; but as this proportion had no support, it was soon broken. The

man that had most strength performed most labour; the most dexterous

turned his labour to best account; the most ingenious found out

methods of lessening his labour; the husbandman required more iron, or

the smith more corn, and while both worked equally, one earned a great

deal by his labour, while the other could scarce live by his. It is

thus that natural inequality insensibly unfolds itself with that

arising from a variety of combinations, and that the difference among

men, developed by the difference of their circumstances, becomes more

sensible, more permanent in its effects, and begins to influence in

the same proportion the condition of private persons.

Things once arrived at this period, it is an easy matter to imagine

the rest. I shall not stop to describe the successive inventions of

other arts, the progress of language, the trial and employments of

talents, the inequality of fortunes, the use or abuse of riches, nor

all the details which follow these, and which every one may easily

supply. I shall just give a glance at mankind placed in this new order

of things.

Behold then all our faculties developed; our memory and imagination at

work, self-love interested; reason rendered active; and the mind

almost arrived at the utmost bounds of that perfection it is capable

of. Behold all our natural qualities put in motion; the rank and

condition of every man established, not only as to the quantum of

property and the power of serving or hurting others, but likewise as

to genius, beauty, strength or address, merit or talents; and as these

were the only qualities which could command respect, it was found

necessary to have or at least to affect them. It was requisite for men

to be thought what they really were not. To be and to appear became

two very different things, and from this distinction sprang pomp and

knavery, and all the vices which form their train. On the other hand,

man, heretofore free and independent, was now in consequence of a

multitude of new wants brought under subjection, as it were, to all

nature, and especially to his fellows, whose slave in some sense he

became even by becoming their master; if rich, he stood in need of

their services, if poor, of their assistance; even mediocrity itself

could not enable him to do without them. He must therefore have been

continually at work to interest them in his happiness, and make them,

if not really, at least apparently find their advantage in labouring

for his: this rendered him sly and artful in his dealings with some,

imperious and cruel in his dealings with others, and laid him under

the necessity of using ill all those whom he stood in need of, as

often as he could not awe them into a compliance with his will, and

did not find it his interest to purchase it at the expense of real

services. In fine, an insatiable ambition, the rage of raising their

relative fortunes, not so much through real necessity, as to over-top

others, inspire all men with a wicked inclination to injure each

other, and with a secret jealousy so much the more dangerous, as to

carry its point with the greater security, it often puts on the face

of benevolence. In a word, sometimes nothing was to be seen but a

contention of endeavours on the one hand, and an opposition of

interests on the other, while a secret desire of thriving at the

expense of others constantly prevailed. Such were the first effects of

property, and the inseparable attendants of infant inequality.

Riches, before the invention of signs to represent them, could scarce

consist in anything but lands and cattle, the only real goods which

men can possess. But when estates increased so much in number and in

extent as to take in whole countries and touch each other, it became

impossible for one man to aggrandise himself but at the expense of

some other; and the supernumerary inhabitants, who were too weak or

too indolent to make such acquisitions in their turn, impoverished

without losing anything, because while everything about them changed

they alone remained the same, were obliged to receive or force their

subsistence from the hands of the rich. And hence began to flow,

according to the different characters of each, domination and slavery,

or violence and rapine. The rich on their side scarce began to taste

the pleasure of commanding, when they preferred it to every other; and

making use of their old slaves to acquire new ones, they no longer

thought of anything but subduing and enslaving their neighbours; like

those ravenous wolves, who having once tasted human flesh, despise

every other food, and devour nothing but men for the future.

It is thus that the most powerful or the most wretched, respectively

considering their power and wretchedness as a kind of title to the

substance of others, even equivalent to that of property, the equality

once broken was followed by the most shocking disorders. It is thus

that the usurpations of the rich, the pillagings of the poor, and the

unbridled passions of all, by stifling the cries of natural

compassion, and the as yet feeble voice of justice, rendered man

avaricious, wicked and ambitious. There arose between the title of the

strongest, and that of the first occupier a perpetual conflict, which

always ended in battery and bloodshed. Infant society became a scene

of the most horrible warfare: Mankind thus debased and harassed, and

no longer able to retreat, or renounce the unhappy acquisitions it had

made; labouring, in short merely to its confusion by the abuse of

those faculties, which in themselves do it so much honour, brought

itself to the very brink of ruin and destruction.

Attonitus novitate mali, divesque miserque,

Effugere optat opes; et quoe modo voverat, odit.

But it is impossible that men should not sooner or later have made

reflections on so wretched a situation, and upon the calamities with

which they were overwhelmed. The rich in particular must have soon

perceived how much they suffered by a perpetual war, of which they

alone supported all the expense, and in which, though all risked life,

they alone risked any substance. Besides, whatever colour they might

pretend to give their usurpations, they sufficiently saw that these

usurpations were in the main founded upon false and precarious titles,

and that what they had acquired by mere force, others could again by

mere force wrest out of their hands, without leaving them the least

room to complain of such a proceeding. Even those, who owed all their

riches to their own industry, could scarce ground their acquisitions

upon a better title. It availed them nothing to say, 'Twas I built

this wall; I acquired this spot by my labour. Who traced it out for

you, another might object, and what right have you to expect payment

at our expense for doing that we did not oblige you to do? Don't you

know that numbers of your brethren perish, or suffer grievously for

want of what you possess more than suffices nature, and that you

should have had the express and unanimous consent of mankind to

appropriate to yourself of their common, more than was requisite for

your private subsistence? Destitute of solid reasons to justify, and

sufficient force to defend himself; crushing individuals with ease,

but with equal ease crushed by numbers; one against all, and unable,

on account of mutual jealousies, to unite with his equals against

banditti united by the common hopes of pillage; the rich man, thus

pressed by necessity, at last conceived the deepest project that ever

entered the human mind: this was to employ in his favour the very

forces that attacked him, to make allies of his enemies, to inspire

them with other maxims, and make them adopt other institutions as

favourable to his pretensions, as the law of nature was unfavourable

to them.

With this view, after laying before his neighbours all the horrors of

a situation, which armed them all one against another, which rendered

their possessions as burdensome as their wants were intolerable, and

in which no one could expect any safety either in poverty or riches,

he easily invented specious arguments to bring them over to his

purpose. "Let us unite," said he, "to secure the weak from

oppression, restrain the ambitious, and secure to every man the

possession of what belongs to him: Let us form rules of justice and

peace, to which all may be obliged to conform, which shall not except

persons, but may in some sort make amends for the caprice of fortune,

by submitting alike the powerful and the weak to the observance of

mutual duties. In a word, instead of turning our forces against

ourselves, let us collect them into a sovereign power, which may

govern us by wise laws, may protect and defend all the members of the

association, repel common enemies, and maintain a perpetual concord

and harmony among us."

Much fewer words of this kind were sufficient to draw in a parcel of

rustics, whom it was an easy matter to impose upon, who had besides

too many quarrels among themselves to live without arbiters, and too

much avarice and ambition to live long without masters. All offered

their necks to the yoke in hopes of securing their liberty; for though

they had sense enough to perceive the advantages of a political

constitution, they had not experience enough to see beforehand the

dangers of it; those among them, who were best qualified to foresee

abuses, were precisely those who expected to benefit by them; even the

soberest judged it requisite to sacrifice one part of their liberty to

ensure the other, as a man, dangerously wounded in any of his limbs,

readily parts with it to save the rest of his body.

Such was, or must have been, had man been left to himself, the origin

of society and of the laws, which increased the fetters of the weak,

and the strength of the rich; irretrievably destroyed natural liberty,

fixed for ever the laws of property and inequality; changed an artful

usurpation into an irrevocable title; and for the benefit of a few

ambitious individuals subjected the rest of mankind to perpetual

labour, servitude, and misery. We may easily conceive how the

establishment of a single society rendered that of all the rest

absolutely necessary, and how, to make head against united forces, it

became necessary for the rest of mankind to unite in their turn.

Societies once formed in this manner, soon multiplied or spread to

such a degree, as to cover the face of the earth; and not to leave a

corner in the whole universe, where a man could throw off the yoke,

and withdraw his head from under the often ill-conducted sword which

he saw perpetually hanging over it. The civil law being thus become

the common rule of citizens, the law of nature no longer obtained but

among the different societies, in which, under the name of the law of

nations, it was qualified by some tacit conventions to render commerce

possible, and supply the place of natural compassion, which, losing by

degrees all that influence over societies which it originally had over

individuals, no longer exists but in some great souls, who consider

themselves as citizens of the world, and forcing the imaginary

barriers that separate people from people, after the example of the

Sovereign Being from whom we all derive our existence, make the whole

human race the object of their benevolence.

Political bodies, thus remaining in a state of nature among

themselves, soon experienced the inconveniences which had obliged

individuals to quit it; and this state became much more fatal to these

great bodies, than it had been before to the individuals which now

composed them. Hence those national wars, those battles, those

murders, those reprisals, which make nature shudder and shock reason;

hence all those horrible prejudices, which make it a virtue and an

honour to shed human blood. The worthiest men learned to consider the

cutting the throats of their fellows as a duty; at length men began to

butcher each other by thousands without knowing for what; and more

murders were committed in a single action, and more horrible disorders

at the taking of a single town, than had been committed in the state

of nature during ages together upon the whole face of the earth. Such

are the first effects we may conceive to have arisen from the division

of mankind into different societies. Let us return to their

institution.

I know that several writers have assigned other origins of political

society; as for instance, the conquests of the powerful, or the union

of the weak; and it is no matter which of these causes we adopt in

regard to what I am going to establish; that, however, which I have

just laid down, seems to me the most natural, for the following

reasons: First, because, in the first case, the right of conquest

being in fact no right at all, it could not serve as a foundation for

any other right, the conqueror and the conquered ever remaining with

respect to each other in a state of war, unless the conquered,

restored to the full possession of their liberty, should freely choose

their conqueror for their chief. Till then, whatever capitulations

might have been made between them, as these capitulations were founded

upon violence, and of course _de facto_ null and void, there could not

have existed in this hypothesis either a true society, or a political

body, or any other law but that of the strongest. Second, because

these words strong and weak, are ambiguous in the second case; for

during the interval between the establishment of the right of property

or prior occupation and that of political government, the meaning of

these terms is better expressed by the words poor and rich, as before

the establishment of laws men in reality had no other means of

reducing their equals, but by invading the property of these equals,

or by parting with some of their own property to them. Third, because

the poor having nothing but their liberty to lose, it would have been

the height of madness in them to give up willingly the only blessing

they had left without obtaining some consideration for it: whereas the

rich being sensible, if I may say so, in every part of their

possessions, it was much easier to do them mischief, and therefore

more incumbent upon them to guard against it; and because, in fine, it

is but reasonable to suppose, that a thing has been invented by him to

whom it could be of service rather than by him to whom it must prove

detrimental.

Government in its infancy had no regular and permanent form. For want

of a sufficient fund of philosophy and experience, men could see no

further than the present inconveniences, and never thought of

providing remedies for future ones, but in proportion as they arose.

In spite of all the labours of the wisest legislators, the political

state still continued imperfect, because it was in a manner the work

of chance; and, as the foundations of it were ill laid, time, though

sufficient to discover its defects and suggest the remedies for them,

could never mend its original vices. Men were continually repairing;

whereas, to erect a good edifice, they should have begun as Lycurgus

did at Sparta, by clearing the area, and removing the old materials.

Society at first consisted merely of some general conventions which

all the members bound themselves to observe, and for the performance

of which the whole body became security to every individual.

Experience was necessary to show the great weakness of such a

constitution, and how easy it was for those, who infringed it, to

escape the conviction or chastisement of faults, of which the public

alone was to be both the witness and the judge; the laws could not

fail of being eluded a thousand ways; inconveniences and disorders

could not but multiply continually, till it was at last found

necessary to think of committing to private persons the dangerous

trust of public authority, and to magistrates the care of enforcing

obedience to the people: for to say that chiefs were elected before

confederacies were formed, and that the ministers of the laws existed

before the laws themselves, is a supposition too ridiculous to deserve

I should seriously refute it.

It would be equally unreasonable to imagine that men at first threw

themselves into the arms of an absolute master, without any conditions

or consideration on his side; and that the first means contrived by

jealous and unconquered men for their common safety was to run hand

over head into slavery. In fact, why did they give themselves

superiors, if it was not to be defended by them against oppression,

and protected in their lives, liberties, and properties, which are in

a manner the constitutional elements of their being? Now in the

relations between man and man, the worst that can happen to one man

being to see himself at the discretion of another, would it not have

been contrary to the dictates of good sense to begin by making over to

a chief the only things for the preservation of which they stood in

need of his assistance? What equivalent could he have offered them

for so fine a privilege? And had he presumed to exact it on pretense

of defending them, would he not have immediately received the answer

in the apologue? What worse treatment can we expect from an enemy? It

is therefore past dispute, and indeed a fundamental maxim of political

law, that people gave themselves chiefs to defend their liberty and

not be enslaved by them. If we have a prince, said Pliny to Trajan, it

is in order that he may keep us from having a master.

Political writers argue in regard to the love of liberty with the same

philosophy that philosophers do in regard to the state of nature; by

the things they see they judge of things very different which they

have never seen, and they attribute to men a natural inclination to

slavery, on account of the patience with which the slaves within their

notice carry the yoke; not reflecting that it is with liberty as with

innocence and virtue, the value of which is not known but by those who

possess them, though the relish for them is lost with the things

themselves. I know the charms of your country, said Brasidas to a

satrap who was comparing the life of the Spartans with that of the

Persepolites; but you can not know the pleasures of mine.

As an unbroken courser erects his mane, paws the ground, and rages at

the bare sight of the bit, while a trained horse patiently suffers

both whip and spur, just so the barbarian will never reach his neck to

the yoke which civilized man carries without murmuring but prefers the

most stormy liberty to a calm subjection. It is not therefore by the

servile disposition of enslaved nations that we must judge of the

natural dispositions of man for or against slavery, but by the

prodigies done by every free people to secure themselves from

oppression. I know that the first are constantly crying up that peace

and tranquillity they enjoy in their irons, and that _miserrimam

servitutem pacem appellant_: but when I see the others sacrifice

pleasures, peace, riches, power, and even life itself to the

preservation of that single jewel so much slighted by those who have

lost it; when I see free-born animals through a natural abhorrence of

captivity dash their brains out against the bars of their prison; when

I see multitudes of naked savages despise European pleasures, and

brave hunger, fire and sword, and death itself to preserve their

independency; I feel that it belongs not to slaves to argue concerning

liberty.

As to paternal authority, from which several have derived absolute

government and every other mode of society, it is sufficient, without

having recourse to Locke and Sidney, to observe that nothing in the

world differs more from the cruel spirit of despotism that the

gentleness of that authority, which looks more to the advantage of him

who obeys than to the utility of him who commands; that by the law of

nature the father continues master of his child no longer than the

child stands in need of his assistance; that after that term they

become equal, and that then the son, entirely independent of the

father, owes him no obedience, but only respect. Gratitude is indeed

a duty which we are bound to pay, but which benefactors can not exact.

Instead of saying that civil society is derived from paternal

authority, we should rather say that it is to the former that the

latter owes its principal force: No one individual was acknowledged as

the father of several other individuals, till they settled about him.

The father's goods, which he can indeed dispose of as he pleases, are

the ties which hold his children to their dependence upon him, and he

may divide his substance among them in proportion as they shall have

deserved his attention by a continual deference to his commands. Now

the subjects of a despotic chief, far from having any such favour to

expect from him, as both themselves and all they have are his

property, or at least are considered by him as such, are obliged to

receive as a favour what he relinquishes to them of their own

property. He does them justice when he strips them; he treats them

with mercy when he suffers them to live. By continuing in this manner

to compare facts with right, we should discover as little solidity as

truth in the voluntary establishment of tyranny; and it would be a

hard matter to prove the validity of a contract which was binding only

on one side, in which one of the parties should stake everything and

the other nothing, and which could turn out to the prejudice of him

alone who had bound himself.

This odious system is even, at this day, far from being that of wise

and good monarchs, and especially of the kings of France, as may be

seen by divers passages in their edicts, and particularly by that of a

celebrated piece published in 1667 in the name and by the orders of

Louis XIV. "Let it therefore not be said that the sovereign is not

subject to the laws of his realm, since, that he is, is a maxim of the

law of nations which flattery has sometimes attacked, but which good

princes have always defended as the tutelary divinity of their realms.

How much more reasonable is it to say with the sage Plato, that the

perfect happiness of a state consists in the subjects obeying their

prince, the prince obeying the laws, and the laws being equitable and

always directed to the good of the public?" I shall not stop to

consider, if, liberty being the most noble faculty of man, it is not

degrading one's nature, reducing one's self to the level of brutes,

who are the slaves of instinct, and even offending the author of one's

being, to renounce without reserve the most precious of his gifts, and

submit to the commission of all the crimes he has forbid us, merely to

gratify a mad or a cruel master; and if this sublime artist ought to

be more irritated at seeing his work destroyed than at seeing it

dishonoured. I shall only ask what right those, who were not afraid

thus to degrade themselves, could have to subject their dependants to

the same ignominy, and renounce, in the name of their posterity,

blessings for which it is not indebted to their liberality, and

without which life itself must appear a burthen to all those who are

worthy to live.

Puffendorf says that, as we can transfer our property from one to

another by contracts and conventions, we may likewise divest ourselves

of our liberty in favour of other men. This, in my opinion, is a very

poor way of arguing; for, in the first place, the property I cede to

another becomes by such cession a thing quite foreign to me, and the

abuse of which can no way affect me; but it concerns me greatly that

my liberty is not abused, and I can not, without incurring the guilt

of the crimes I may be forced to commit, expose myself to become the

instrument of any. Besides, the right of property being of mere human

convention and institution, every man may dispose as he pleases of

what he possesses: But the case is otherwise with regard to the

essential gifts of nature, such as life and liberty, which every man

is permitted to enjoy, and of which it is doubtful at least whether

any man has a right to divest himself: By giving up the one, we

degrade our being; by giving up the other we annihilate it as much as

it is our power to do so; and as no temporal enjoyments can indemnify

us for the loss of either, it would be at once offending both nature

and reason to renounce them for any consideration. But though we could

transfer our liberty as we do our substance, the difference would be

very great with regard to our children, who enjoy our substance but by

a cession of our right; whereas liberty being a blessing, which as men

they hold from nature, their parents have no right to strip them of

it; so that as to establish slavery it was necessary to do violence to

nature, so it was necessary to alter nature to perpetuate such a

right; and the jurisconsults, who have gravely pronounced that the

child of a slave comes a slave into the world, have in other words

decided, that a man does not come a man into the world.

It therefore appears to me incontestably true, that not only

governments did not begin by arbitrary power, which is but the

corruption and extreme term of government, and at length brings it

back to the law of the strongest, against which governments were at

first the remedy, but even that, allowing they had commenced in this

manner, such power being illegal in itself could never have served as

a foundation to the rights of society, nor of course to the inequality

of institution.

I shall not now enter upon the inquiries which still remain to be made

into the nature of the fundamental pacts of every kind of government,

but, following the common opinion, confine myself in this place to the

establishment of the political body as a real contract between the

multitude and the chiefs elected by it. A contract by which both

parties oblige themselves to the observance of the laws that are

therein stipulated, and form the bands of their union. The multitude

having, on occasion of the social relations between them, concentered

all their wills in one person, all the articles, in regard to which

this will explains itself, become so many fundamental laws, which

oblige without exception all the members of the state, and one of

which laws regulates the choice and the power of the magistrates

appointed to look to the execution of the rest. This power extends to

everything that can maintain the constitution, but extends to nothing

that can alter it. To this power are added honours, that may render

the laws and the ministers of them respectable; and the persons of the

ministers are distinguished by certain prerogatives, which may make

them amends for the great fatigues inseparable from a good

administration. The magistrate, on his side, obliges himself not to

use the power with which he is intrusted but conformably to the

intention of his constituents, to maintain every one of them in the

peaceable possession of his property, and upon all occasions prefer

the good of the public to his own private interest.

Before experience had demonstrated, or a thorough knowledge of the

human heart had pointed out, the abuses inseparable from such a

constitution, it must have appeared so much the more perfect, as those

appointed to look to its preservation were themselves most concerned

therein; for magistracy and its rights being built solely on the

fundamental laws, as soon as these ceased to exist, the magistrates

would cease to be lawful, the people would no longer be bound to obey

them, and, as the essence of the state did not consist in the

magistrates but in the laws, the members of it would immediately

become entitled to their primitive and natural liberty.

A little reflection would afford us new arguments in confirmation of

this truth, and the nature of the contract might alone convince us

that it can not be irrevocable: for if there was no superior power

capable of guaranteeing the fidelity of the contracting parties and of

obliging them to fulfil their mutual engagements, they would remain

sole judges in their own cause, and each of them would always have a

right to renounce the contract, as soon as he discovered that the

other had broke the conditions of it, or that these conditions ceased

to suit his private convenience. Upon this principle, the right of

abdication may probably be founded. Now, to consider as we do nothing

but what is human in this institution, if the magistrate, who has all

the power in his own hands, and who appropriates to himself all the

advantages of the contract, has notwithstanding a right to divest

himself of his authority; how much a better right must the people, who

pay for all the faults of its chief, have to renounce their dependence

upon him. But the shocking dissensions and disorders without number,

which would be the necessary consequence of so dangerous a privilege,

show more than anything else how much human governments stood in need

of a more solid basis than that of mere reason, and how necessary it

was for the public tranquillity, that the will of the Almighty should

interpose to give to sovereign authority, a sacred and inviolable

character, which should deprive subjects of the mischievous right to

dispose of it to whom they pleased. If mankind had received no other

advantages from religion, this alone would be sufficient to make them

adopt and cherish it, since it is the means of saving more blood than

fanaticism has been the cause of spilling. But to resume the thread of

our hypothesis.

The various forms of government owe their origin to the various

degrees of inequality between the members, at the time they first

coalesced into a political body. Where a man happened to be eminent

for power, for virtue, for riches, or for credit, he became sole

magistrate, and the state assumed a monarchical form; if many of

pretty equal eminence out-topped all the rest, they were jointly

elected, and this election produced an aristocracy; those, between

whose fortune or talents there happened to be no such disproportion,

and who had deviated less from the state of nature, retained in common

the supreme administration, and formed a democracy. Time demonstrated

which of these forms suited mankind best. Some remained altogether

subject to the laws; others soon bowed their necks to masters. The

former laboured to preserve their liberty; the latter thought of

nothing but invading that of their neighbours, jealous at seeing

others enjoy a blessing which themselves had lost. In a word, riches

and conquest fell to the share of the one, and virtue and happiness to

that of the other.

In these various modes of government the offices at first were all

elective; and when riches did not preponderate, the preference was

given to merit, which gives a natural ascendant, and to age, which is

the parent of deliberateness in council, and experience in execution.

The ancients among the Hebrews, the Geronts of Sparta, the Senate of

Rome, nay, the very etymology of our word seigneur, show how much gray

hairs were formerly respected. The oftener the choice fell upon old

men, the oftener it became necessary to repeat it, and the more the

trouble of such repetitions became sensible; electioneering took

place; factions arose; the parties contracted ill blood; civil wars

blazed forth; the lives of the citizens were sacrificed to the

pretended happiness of the state; and things at last came to such a

pass, as to be ready to relapse into their primitive confusion. The

ambition of the principal men induced them to take advantage of these

circumstances to perpetuate the hitherto temporary charges in their

families; the people already inured to dependence, accustomed to ease

and the conveniences of life, and too much enervated to break their

fetters, consented to the increase of their slavery for the sake of

securing their tranquillity; and it is thus that chiefs, become

hereditary, contracted the habit of considering magistracies as a

family estate, and themselves as proprietors of those communities, of

which at first they were but mere officers; to call their

fellow-citizens their slaves; to look upon them, like so many cows or

sheep, as a part of their substance; and to style themselves the peers

of Gods, and Kings of Kings.

By pursuing the progress of inequality in these different revolutions,

we shall discover that the establishment of laws and of the right of

property was the first term of it; the institution of magistrates the

second; and the third and last the changing of legal into arbitrary

power; so that the different states of rich and poor were authorized

by the first epoch; those of powerful and weak by the second; and by

the third those of master and slave, which formed the last degree of

inequality, and the term in which all the rest at last end, till new

revolutions entirely dissolve the government, or bring it back nearer

to its legal constitution.

To conceive the necessity of this progress, we are not so much to

consider the motives for the establishment of political bodies, as the

forms these bodies assume in their administration; and the

inconveniences with which they are essentially attended; for those

vices, which render social institutions necessary, are the same which

render the abuse of such institutions unavoidable; and as (Sparta

alone excepted, whose laws chiefly regarded the education of children,

and where Lycurgus established such manners and customs, as in a great

measure made laws needless,) the laws, in general less strong than the

passions, restrain men without changing them; it would be no hard

matter to prove that every government, which carefully guarding

against all alteration and corruption should scrupulously comply with

the ends of its institution, was unnecessarily instituted; and that a

country, where no one either eluded the laws, or made an ill use of

magistracy, required neither laws nor magistrates.

Political distinctions are necessarily attended with civil

distinctions. The inequality between the people and the chiefs

increase so fast as to be soon felt by the private members, and

appears among them in a thousand shapes according to their passions,

their talents, and the circumstances of affairs. The magistrate can

not usurp any illegal power without making himself creatures, with

whom he must divide it. Besides, the citizens of a free state suffer

themselves to be oppressed merely in proportion as, hurried on by a

blind ambition, and looking rather below than above them, they come to

love authority more than independence. When they submit to fetters,

'tis only to be the better able to fetter others in their turn. It is

no easy matter to make him obey, who does not wish to command; and the

most refined policy would find it impossible to subdue those men, who

only desire to be independent; but inequality easily gains ground

among base and ambitious souls, ever ready to run the risks of

fortune, and almost indifferent whether they command or obey, as she

proves either favourable or adverse to them. Thus then there must have

been a time, when the eyes of the people were bewitched to such a

degree, that their rulers needed only to have said to the most pitiful

wretch, "Be great you and all your posterity," to make him immediately

appear great in the eyes of every one as well as in his own; and his

descendants took still more upon them, in proportion to their removes

from him: the more distant and uncertain the cause, the greater the

effect; the longer line of drones a family produced, the more

illustrious it was reckoned.

Were this a proper place to enter into details, I could easily explain

in what manner inequalities in point of credit and authority become

unavoidable among private persons the moment that, united into one

body, they are obliged to compare themselves one with another, and to

note the differences which they find in the continual use every man

must make of his neighbour. These differences are of several kinds;

but riches, nobility or rank, power and personal merit, being in

general the principal distinctions, by which men in society measure

each other, I could prove that the harmony or conflict between these

different forces is the surest indication of the good or bad original

constitution of any state: I could make it appear that, as among these

four kinds of inequality, personal qualities are the source of all the

rest, riches is that in which they ultimately terminate, because,

being the most immediately useful to the prosperity of individuals,

and the most easy to communicate, they are made use of to purchase

every other distinction. By this observation we are enabled to judge

with tolerable exactness, how much any people has deviated from its

primitive institution, and what steps it has still to make to the

extreme term of corruption. I could show how much this universal

desire of reputation, of honours, of preference, with which we are all

devoured, exercises and compares our talents and our forces: how much

it excites and multiplies our passions; and, by creating an universal

competition, rivalship, or rather enmity among men, how many

disappointments, successes, and catastrophes of every kind it daily

causes among the innumerable pretenders whom it engages in the same

career. I could show that it is to this itch of being spoken of, to

this fury of distinguishing ourselves which seldom or never gives us a

moment's respite, that we owe both the best and the worst things among

us, our virtues and our vices, our sciences and our errors, our

conquerors and our philosophers; that is to say, a great many bad

things to a very few good ones. I could prove, in short, that if we

behold a handful of rich and powerful men seated on the pinnacle of

fortune and greatness, while the crowd grovel in obscurity and want,

it is merely because the first prize what they enjoy but in the same

degree that others want it, and that, without changing their

condition, they would cease to be happy the minute the people ceased

to be miserable.

But these details would alone furnish sufficient matter for a more

considerable work, in which might be weighed the advantages and

disadvantages of every species of government, relatively to the rights

of man in a state of nature, and might likewise be unveiled all the

different faces under which inequality has appeared to this day, and

may hereafter appear to the end of time, according to the nature of

these several governments, and the revolutions time must unavoidably

occasion in them. We should then see the multitude oppressed by

domestic tyrants in consequence of those very precautions taken by

them to guard against foreign masters. We should see oppression

increase continually without its being ever possible for the oppressed

to know where it would stop, nor what lawful means they had left to

check its progress. We should see the rights of citizens, and the

liberties of nations extinguished by slow degrees, and the groans, and

protestations and appeals of the weak treated as seditious murmurings.

We should see policy confine to a mercenary portion of the people the

honour of defending the common cause. We should see imposts made

necessary by such measures, the disheartened husbandman desert his

field even in time of peace, and quit the plough to take up the sword.

We should see fatal and whimsical rules laid down concerning the point

of honour. We should see the champions of their country sooner or

later become her enemies, and perpetually holding their poniards to

the breasts of their fellow citizens. Nay, the time would come when

they might be heard to say to the oppressor of their country:

Pectore si fratris gladium juguloque parentis

Condere me jubeas, gravidoeque in viscera partu

Conjugis, in vita peragam tamen omnia dextra.

From the vast inequality of conditions and fortunes, from the great

variety of passions and of talents, of useless arts, of pernicious

arts, of frivolous sciences, would issue clouds of prejudices equally

contrary to reason, to happiness, to virtue. We should see the chiefs

foment everything that tends to weaken men formed into societies by

dividing them; everything that, while it gives society an air of

apparent harmony, sows in it the seeds of real division; everything

that can inspire the different orders with mutual distrust and hatred

by an opposition of their rights and interest, and of course

strengthen that power which contains them all.

'Tis from the bosom of this disorder and these revolutions, that

despotism gradually rearing up her hideous crest, and devouring in

every part of the state all that still remained sound and untainted,

would at last issue to trample upon the laws and the people, and

establish herself upon the ruins of the republic. The times

immediately preceding this last alteration would be times of calamity

and trouble: but at last everything would be swallowed up by the

monster; and the people would no longer have chiefs or laws, but only

tyrants. At this fatal period all regard to virtue and manners would

likewise disappear; for despotism, _cui ex honesto nulla est spes_,

tolerates no other master, wherever it reigns; the moment it speaks,

probity and duty lose all their influence, and the blindest obedience

is the only virtue the miserable slaves have left them to practise.

This is the last term of inequality, the extreme point which closes

the circle and meets that from which we set out. 'Tis here that all

private men return to their primitive equality, because they are no

longer of any account; and that, the subjects having no longer any law

but that of their master, nor the master any other law but his

passions, all notions of good and principles of justice again

disappear. 'Tis here that everything returns to the sole law of the

strongest, and of course to a new state of nature different from that

with which we began, in as much as the first was the state of nature

in its purity, and the last the consequence of excessive corruption.

There is, in other respects, so little difference between these two

states, and the contract of government is so much dissolved by

despotism, that the despot is no longer master than he continues the

strongest, and that, as soon as his slaves can expel him, they may do

it without his having the least right to complain of their using him

ill. The insurrection, which ends in the death or despotism of a

sultan, is as juridical an act as any by which the day before he

disposed of the lives and fortunes of his subjects. Force alone upheld

him, force alone overturns him. Thus all things take place and succeed

in their natural order; and whatever may be the upshot of these hasty

and frequent revolutions, no one man has reason to complain of

another's injustice, but only of his own indiscretion or bad fortune.

By thus discovering and following the lost and forgotten tracks, by

which man from the natural must have arrived at the civil state; by

restoring, with the intermediate positions which I have been just

indicating, those which want of leisure obliges me to suppress, or

which my imagination has not suggested, every attentive reader must

unavoidably be struck at the immense space which separates these two

states. 'Tis in this slow succession of things he may meet with the

solution of an infinite number of problems in morality and politics,

which philosophers are puzzled to solve. He will perceive that, the

mankind of one age not being the mankind of another, the reason why

Diogenes could not find a man was, that he sought among his

cotemporaries the man of an earlier period: Cato, he will then see,

fell with Rome and with liberty, because he did not suit the age in

which he lived; and the greatest of men served only to astonish that

world, which would have cheerfully obeyed him, had he come into it

five hundred years earlier. In a word, he will find himself in a

condition to understand how the soul and the passions of men by

insensible alterations change as it were their nature; how it comes to

pass, that at the long run our wants and our pleasures change objects;

that, original man vanishing by degrees, society no longer offers to

our inspection but an assemblage of artificial men and factitious

passions, which are the work of all these new relations, and have no

foundation in nature. Reflection teaches us nothing on that head, but

what experience perfectly confirms. Savage man and civilised man

differ so much at bottom in point of inclinations and passions, that

what constitutes the supreme happiness of the one would reduce the

other to despair. The first sighs for nothing but repose and liberty;

he desires only to live, and to be exempt from labour; nay, the

ataraxy of the most confirmed Stoic falls short of his consummate

indifference for every other object. On the contrary, the citizen

always in motion, is perpetually sweating and toiling, and racking his

brains to find out occupations still more laborious: He continues a

drudge to his last minute; nay, he courts death to be able to live, or

renounces life to acquire immortality. He cringes to men in power whom

he hates, and to rich men whom he despises; he sticks at nothing to

have the honour of serving them; he is not ashamed to value himself on

his own weakness and the protection they afford him; and proud of his

chains, he speaks with disdain of those who have not the honour of

being the partner of his bondage. What a spectacle must the painful

and envied labours of an European minister of state form in the eyes

of a Caribbean! How many cruel deaths would not this indolent savage

prefer to such a horrid life, which very often is not even sweetened

by the pleasure of doing good? But to see the drift of so many cares,

his mind should first have affixed some meaning to these words power

and reputation; he should be apprised that there are men who consider

as something the looks of the rest of mankind, who know how to be

happy and satisfied with themselves on the testimony of others sooner

than upon their own. In fact, the real source of all those

differences, is that the savage lives within himself, whereas the

citizen, constantly beside himself, knows only how to live in the

opinion of others; insomuch that it is, if I may say so, merely from

their judgment that he derives the consciousness of his own existence.

It is foreign to my subject to show how this disposition engenders so

much indifference for good and evil, notwithstanding so many and such

fine discourses of morality; how everything, being reduced to

appearances, becomes mere art and mummery; honour, friendship, virtue,

and often vice itself, which we at last learn the secret to boast of;

how, in short, ever inquiring of others what we are, and never daring

to question ourselves on so delicate a point, in the midst of so much

philosophy, humanity, and politeness, and so many sublime maxims, we

have nothing to show for ourselves but a deceitful and frivolous

exterior, honour without virtue, reason without wisdom, and pleasure

without happiness. It is sufficient that I have proved that this is

not the original condition of man, and that it is merely the spirit of

society, and the inequality which society engenders, that thus change

and transform all our natural inclinations.

I have endeavoured to exhibit the origin and progress of inequality,

the institution and abuse of political societies, as far as these

things are capable of being deduced from the nature of man by the mere

light of reason, and independently of those sacred maxims which give

to the sovereign authority the sanction of divine right. It follows

from this picture, that as there is scarce any inequality among men in

a state of nature, all that which we now behold owes its force and its

growth to the development of our faculties and the improvement of our

understanding, and at last becomes permanent and lawful by the

establishment of property and of laws. It likewise follows that moral

inequality, authorised by any right that is merely positive, clashes

with natural right, as often as it does not combine in the same

proportion with physical inequality: a distinction which sufficiently

determines, what we are able to think in that respect of that kind of

inequality which obtains in all civilised nations, since it is

evidently against the law of nature that infancy should command old

age, folly conduct wisdom, and a handful of men should be ready to

choke with superfluities, while the famished multitude want the

commonest necessaries of life.

[Transcriber's Note: Some words which appear to be potential typos are

printed as such in the original book: These possible words include

cotemporaries and oftens. The paragraph starting with the words "This

odius system is even" contains unmatched quotes, which have been

reproduced as they appeared in the orginal. This work was transcribed

from a anthology (Harvard Classics Volume 34) published in 1910. The

editor of the entire series was Charles W. Eliot. The name of the

translator was not given, nor was the name of the author of the

introduction. Indented lines indicate embedded verse that should not

be re-wrapped.]

A Discourse Upon the Origin and the Foundation of the Inequality Among Mankind · 第 5 / 5 题